rcu: Fix missed wakeup of exp_wq waiters
authorNeeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@codeaurora.org>
Tue, 19 Nov 2019 03:17:07 +0000 (03:17 +0000)
committerGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Sun, 26 Sep 2021 11:37:28 +0000 (13:37 +0200)
commit fd6bc19d7676a060a171d1cf3dcbf6fd797eb05f upstream.

Tasks waiting within exp_funnel_lock() for an expedited grace period to
elapse can be starved due to the following sequence of events:

1. Tasks A and B both attempt to start an expedited grace
period at about the same time. This grace period will have
completed when the lower four bits of the rcu_state structure's
->expedited_sequence field are 0b'0100', for example, when the
initial value of this counter is zero. Task A wins, and thus
does the actual work of starting the grace period, including
acquiring the rcu_state structure's .exp_mutex and sets the
counter to 0b'0001'.

2. Because task B lost the race to start the grace period, it
waits on ->expedited_sequence to reach 0b'0100' inside of
exp_funnel_lock(). This task therefore blocks on the rcu_node
structure's ->exp_wq[1] field, keeping in mind that the
end-of-grace-period value of ->expedited_sequence (0b'0100')
is shifted down two bits before indexing the ->exp_wq[] field.

3. Task C attempts to start another expedited grace period,
but blocks on ->exp_mutex, which is still held by Task A.

4. The aforementioned expedited grace period completes, so that
->expedited_sequence now has the value 0b'0100'.  A kworker task
therefore acquires the rcu_state structure's ->exp_wake_mutex
and starts awakening any tasks waiting for this grace period.

5. One of the first tasks awakened happens to be Task A.  Task A
therefore releases the rcu_state structure's ->exp_mutex,
which allows Task C to start the next expedited grace period,
which causes the lower four bits of the rcu_state structure's
->expedited_sequence field to become 0b'0101'.

6. Task C's expedited grace period completes, so that the lower four
bits of the rcu_state structure's ->expedited_sequence field now
become 0b'1000'.

7. The kworker task from step 4 above continues its wakeups.
Unfortunately, the wake_up_all() refetches the rcu_state
structure's .expedited_sequence field:

wake_up_all(&rnp->exp_wq[rcu_seq_ctr(rcu_state.expedited_sequence) & 0x3]);

This results in the wakeup being applied to the rcu_node
structure's ->exp_wq[2] field, which is unfortunate given that
Task B is instead waiting on ->exp_wq[1].

On a busy system, no harm is done (or at least no permanent harm is done).
Some later expedited grace period will redo the wakeup.  But on a quiet
system, such as many embedded systems, it might be a good long time before
there was another expedited grace period.  On such embedded systems,
this situation could therefore result in a system hang.

This issue manifested as DPM device timeout during suspend (which
usually qualifies as a quiet time) due to a SCSI device being stuck in
_synchronize_rcu_expedited(), with the following stack trace:

schedule()
synchronize_rcu_expedited()
synchronize_rcu()
scsi_device_quiesce()
scsi_bus_suspend()
dpm_run_callback()
__device_suspend()

This commit therefore prevents such delays, timeouts, and hangs by
making rcu_exp_wait_wake() use its "s" argument consistently instead of
refetching from rcu_state.expedited_sequence.

Fixes: 3b5f668e715b ("rcu: Overlap wakeups with next expedited grace period")
Signed-off-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@codeaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David Chen <david.chen@nutanix.com>
Acked-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@codeaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h

index 46d61b59773187fee241e114b3451823c4757fde..f90d10c1c3c8d9a910855d90ed12c1465af14e04 100644 (file)
@@ -534,7 +534,7 @@ static void rcu_exp_wait_wake(struct rcu_state *rsp, unsigned long s)
                        spin_unlock(&rnp->exp_lock);
                }
                smp_mb(); /* All above changes before wakeup. */
-               wake_up_all(&rnp->exp_wq[rcu_seq_ctr(rsp->expedited_sequence) & 0x3]);
+               wake_up_all(&rnp->exp_wq[rcu_seq_ctr(s) & 0x3]);
        }
        trace_rcu_exp_grace_period(rsp->name, s, TPS("endwake"));
        mutex_unlock(&rsp->exp_wake_mutex);